Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #11998 > unrolled thread

Re: Python 2 removal in sid/bullseye: Progress and next steps

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.maint.python

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Python 2 removal in sid/bullseye: Progress and next steps Yves-Alexis Perez <corsac@debian.org> - 2019-11-11 11:50 +0100
    Re: Python 2 removal in sid/bullseye: Progress and next steps Yves-Alexis Perez <corsac@debian.org> - 2019-11-11 12:10 +0100
      Re: Python 2 removal in sid/bullseye: Progress and next steps Ondrej Novy <novy@ondrej.org> - 2019-11-11 13:20 +0100
    Re: Python 2 removal in sid/bullseye: Progress and next steps Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org> - 2019-11-11 12:10 +0100

#11998 — Re: Python 2 removal in sid/bullseye: Progress and next steps

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On Mon, 2019-11-11 at 10:33 +0100, Ondřej Nový wrote:
> We are going to raise the severity of the py2removal bugs to "serious"
> in several steps.  In the
> first phase we are going to raise severity of the py2removal bugs for 
> all leaf module packages and low popcon (< 300) application packages.
> Bugs marked with the "py2keep" user tag will not have their severity
> raised.  If nobody fixes that bug, the packages will be auto-removed
> from testing.
> We will also then file bug reports against ftp.debian.org to remove
> such packages from unstable.  We are going to do this semi-
> automatically as additional packages become leaf packages.

Hi,

sorry if this has been discussed already somewhere else (I stopped reading
- -devel@ a long time ago) but is there something done to improve NEW processing
here? I have two package sitting there because of the introduction of a
- -python3 binary package. I don't think it's really make sense to remove
python2 stuff if python3 stuff can't enter the archive…

Regards,
- -- 
Yves-Alexis
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEE8vi34Qgfo83x35gF3rYcyPpXRFsFAl3JO2EACgkQ3rYcyPpX
RFvT6QgAoc0t3/jqSqvd21TExKaD5cfAapJva9/pjABOX//ZUOF4WFgbmfeOso3h
Qz3spQJgrxMYc1R6EZYVi6qlMesH4uDmKaGhfskaVvIL640k7OxMy9taXXBOW2N9
4Sn6ILPqwLp6OmDJxg9I5jIkxJE+VlLJzvJderbEueu67sulD3pCyA6E1HQGqB2R
S7f0YHVEnAhBDmChZBCXtrChZwt/DHwAQlI/Ud4OlNVyHTKdl37myqk+Es5S/8vL
VO0zyIgiyLhLyQJsw9gTrGkl4aXFQhIfcyzGUgOvQredQb9airhJCTU+djVShk7Y
neEVMDF30IBRwyepKMJG8OYOJ8O1tQ==
=6uw7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#11999

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On Mon, 2019-11-11 at 12:04 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > sorry if this has been discussed already somewhere else (I stopped reading
> > - -devel@ a long time ago) but is there something done to improve NEW processing
> > here? I have two package sitting there because of the introduction of a
> > - -python3 binary package. I don't think it's really make sense to remove
> > python2 stuff if python3 stuff can't enter the archive…
> 
> well, at least you can name the packages in your email ...

Hi Matthias,

the packages are libimobiledevices and libplist but this mail wasn't specific
about my packages (or I would have contacted ftpmasters list) but rather a
generic question about the interaction between the python transition and
current situation with NEW processing.

Regards,
- -- 
Yves-Alexis
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEE8vi34Qgfo83x35gF3rYcyPpXRFsFAl3JQL4ACgkQ3rYcyPpX
RFuEzQf/X2eaVjrjP1dMKHEhTz9Ez6fCjSEKDlHC5XfsFb4AmtPhkvUUBdeczmO0
aC6+m9Izpsr0c6Vr52GXbSrZsaAtEB93+4FkDMwt2FvXQEi+Azvl9Hub5jAJx7WT
ocinEEQVgP2d4vxAs8ROY86Qm77nVKJ4jMw35Sjxvw1HNrA9fgIepk+0b9XA0Kxf
f5GOvb1fxnEjy6L5zqYQMRkdTrGvoRFLMjWxAwLj/VpWadr3jXBrObtIbCV4Lywk
DIlJ56mnMz9u12i35U0ccwXYvlHSCI9g9V99JWWLJdAEXG8Pi1tcv935XkFuyXAz
jXCaUlLik64/FK7YkIrBS2WtmudViQ==
=V+3N
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12001

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hi,

po 11. 11. 2019 v 12:07 odesílatel Yves-Alexis Perez <corsac@debian.org>
napsal:

> generic question about the interaction between the python transition and
> current situation with NEW processing.
>

I think it's unrelated.

State of NEW processing is stable for long time. But if you need to accept
NEW binary-only I think it's fine to ping ftp-masters over IRC. I already
did this few times and they don't bite :)

-- 
Best regards
 Ondřej Nový

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12000

On 11.11.19 11:43, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
> 
> On Mon, 2019-11-11 at 10:33 +0100, Ondřej Nový wrote:
>> We are going to raise the severity of the py2removal bugs to "serious"
>> in several steps.  In the
>> first phase we are going to raise severity of the py2removal bugs for
>> all leaf module packages and low popcon (< 300) application packages.
>> Bugs marked with the "py2keep" user tag will not have their severity
>> raised.  If nobody fixes that bug, the packages will be auto-removed
>> from testing.
>> We will also then file bug reports against ftp.debian.org to remove
>> such packages from unstable.  We are going to do this semi-
>> automatically as additional packages become leaf packages.
> 
> Hi,
> 
> sorry if this has been discussed already somewhere else (I stopped reading
> - -devel@ a long time ago) but is there something done to improve NEW processing
> here? I have two package sitting there because of the introduction of a
> - -python3 binary package. I don't think it's really make sense to remove
> python2 stuff if python3 stuff can't enter the archive…

well, at least you can name the packages in your email ...

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.maint.python

csiph-web